BortJesus, this guy. He did what he could to render Hillary "unqualified" and "corrupt" in the Left's eyes, offered only token support in the general election, and now that Trump's in office he gets to play Principled Voice Of The Resistance when he's as responsible as anyone for pushing Trump to victory.

The fucker never showed us his financials either, same as Trump.

simon666Bort, that's fairly expressive, negative, though I'm not sure what else to take from it. As such it seems like an ad hominem. What did you not like about the content of Sanders's points?

Spaceman Africahillary did everything on her own to render herself unqualified and corrupt

RaggamuffinHe's the one who was trying to warn us that we were about to nominate the only person who could possibly lose an election to the biggest nightmare candidate in American history.

NewHeavenSockmanbort's nonstop dribbling of wild-eyed ramblings about the fifth column of berniebros are like 70% of the reason i still browse this site

SolRo'trying to warn' is a funny way to say "undermined the elected candidate, the party, and the whole process because he didn't get to win like he deserved"

SolRoAnd at the end of the day bernie is just a not-as-rich, left-wing version of trump. Just as secretive and exactly as much a self-centered petulant child that hasn't accomplished anything.

simon666SolRo, you take too much for granted in your assertions. Maybe you're right, I don't know, but I can't tell from what you say. So I understand what you're saying it's presumably moral significance, kindly provide:

1. The norms of political part electoral processes for the Republicans and Democrats.

2. If your objections are with those norms or with how particular candidates adhere or break away from those norms.

It is impossible to say what would have happened under a fictional scenario, but Sanders supporters often dangle polls from early summer showing he would have performed better than Clinton against Trump. They ignored the fact that Sanders had not yet faced a real campaign against him. Clinton was in the delicate position of dealing with a large portion of voters who treated Sanders more like the Messiah than just another candidate. She was playing the long game—attacking Sanders strongly enough to win, but gently enough to avoid alienating his supporters. Given her overwhelming support from communities of color—for example, about 70 percent of African-American voters cast their ballot for her—Clinton had a firewall that would be difficult for Sanders to breach.

When Sanders promoted free college tuition—a primary part of his platform that attracted young people—that didn’t mean much for almost half of all Democrats, who don’t attend—or even plan to attend—plan to attend a secondary school. In fact, Sanders was basically telling the working poor and middle class who never planned to go beyond high school that college students—the people with even greater opportunities in life—were at the top of his priority list.

So what would have happened when Sanders hit a real opponent, someone who did not care about alienating the young college voters in his base? I have seen the opposition book assembled by Republicans for Sanders, and it was brutal. The Republicans would have torn him apart. And while Sanders supporters might delude themselves into believing that they could have defended him against all of this, there is a name for politicians who play defense all the time: losers.

Here are a few tastes of what was in store for Sanders, straight out of the Republican playbook: He thinks rape is A-OK. In 1972, when he was 31, Sanders wrote a fictitious essay in which he described a woman enjoying being raped by three men. Yes, there is an explanation for it—a long, complicated one, just like the one that would make clear why the Clinton emails story was nonsense. And we all know how well that worked out.

Then there’s the fact that Sanders was on unemployment until his mid-30s, and that he stole electricity from a neighbor after failing to pay his bills, and that he co-sponsored a bill to ship Vermont’s nuclear waste to a poor Hispanic community in Texas, where it could be dumped. You can just see the words “environmental racist” on Republican billboards. And if you can’t, I already did. They were in the Republican opposition research book as a proposal on how to frame the nuclear waste issue.

Also on the list: Sanders violated campaign finance laws, criticized Clinton for supporting the 1994 crime bill that he voted for, and he voted against the Amber Alert system. His pitch for universal health care would have been used against him too, since it was tried in his home state of Vermont and collapsed due to excessive costs. Worst of all, the Republicans also had video of Sanders at a 1985 rally thrown by the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua where half a million people chanted, “Here, there, everywhere/the Yankee will die,’’ while President Daniel Ortega condemned “state terrorism” by America. Sanders said, on camera, supporting the Sandinistas was “patriotic.

”The Republicans had at least four other damning Sanders videos (I don’t know what they showed), and the opposition research folder was almost 2-feet thick. (The section calling him a communist with connections to Castro alone would have cost him Florida.) In other words, the belief that Sanders would have walked into the White House based on polls taken before anyone really attacked him is a delusion built on a scaffolding of political ignorance.

Could Sanders still have won? Well, Trump won, so anything is possible. But Sanders supporters puffing up their chests as they arrogantly declare Trump would have definitely lost against their candidate deserve to be ignored.

Which leads back to the main point: Awash in false conspiracy theories and petulant immaturity, liberals put Trump in the White House. Trump won slightly fewer votes than Romney did in 2012—60.5 million compared with 60.9 million. On the other hand, almost 5 million Obama voters either stayed home or cast their votes for someone else. More than twice as many millennials—a group heavily invested in the “Sanders was cheated out of the nomination” fantasy—voted third-party. The laughably unqualified Jill Stein of the Green Party got 1.3 million votes; those voters almost certainly opposed Trump; if just the Stein voters in Michigan had cast their ballot for Clinton, she probably would have won the state. And there is no telling how many disaffected Sanders voters cast their ballot for Trump.

Of course, there will still be those voters who snarl, “She didn’t earn my vote,” as if somehow their narcissism should override all other considerations in the election. That, however, is not what an election is about. Voters are charged with choosing the best person to lead the country, not the one who appeals the most to their egos.

Juice Eggs McKennaI don't often agree with DQL but I think you're pretty much correct on this.

Also, fuck this whole "secret agenda" bullshit. Bernie had a clearly stated, progressive and specific, if somewhat simplistic, platform which he promoted at every opportunity and never hid from anyone.

Pillager"She was playing the long game—attacking Sanders strongly enough to win, but gently enough to avoid alienating his supporters."

You overestimate her limited charisma. She vexed more than half the country into picking Norman Osborne as POTUS.

'Given her overwhelming support from communities of color—for example, about 70 percent of African-American voters cast their ballot for her—Clinton had a firewall that would be difficult for Sanders to breach.'

Lotta good that did. Identity politics pandering goes nowhere. See the KKK.

" I have seen the opposition book assembled by Republicans for Sanders, and it was brutal. The Republicans would have torn him apart. And while Sanders supporters might delude themselves into believing that they could have defended him against all of this, there is a name for politicians who play defense all the time: losers."

Bernie would have campaigned in the Midwest. Something, Shrillary Wouldn't Do.

'Working class people would have flocked to Gandalf.
Sanders, straight out of the Republican playbook: He thinks rape is A-OK. In 1972, when he was 31, Sanders wrote a fictitious essay in which he described a woman enjoying being raped by three men.'

How out of touch are you? 50 Shades of Gray was a hot topic of discussion where I work. Since it was a best seller, that type of fantasy must have followers...

'“environmental racist” on Republican billboards.'

Vote for me or a wall goes up & you get kicked out of the country. Simple counter.

'Worst of all, the Republicans also had video of Sanders at a 1985 rally thrown by the leftist Sandinista government'

Ancient history, Reagan called the Contra "Founding Fathers" & helped fund the Taliban. No one cares but you Bort.

'(The section calling him a communist with connections to Castro alone would have cost him Florida.)'

It's Florida, who cares.

"the belief that Sanders would have walked into the White House based on polls taken before anyone really attacked him is a delusion built on a scaffolding of political ignorance."

And the belief that Hillary was electable was delusional bordering on psychotic. She was an unlikable, two faced Hag & was hated by most people. That ain't sexist, a lot of women hate her.

'Could Sanders still have won? Well, Trump won, so anything is possible. But Sanders supporters puffing up their chests as they arrogantly declare Trump would have definitely lost against their candidate deserve to be ignored.'

Those who ignore history are doomed to see Trump reelected.

"Which leads back to the main point: Awash in false conspiracy theories and petulant immaturity,"

You mean like the Russians & Wikileaks?

"liberals put Trump in the White House. Trump won slightly fewer votes than Romney did in 2012—60.5 million compared with 60.9 million. On the other hand, almost 5 million Obama voters either stayed home or cast their votes for someone else. More than twice as many millennials—a group heavily invested in the “Sanders was cheated out of the nomination” fantasy—voted third-party."

Next time, don't hold a loser up like Hillary & claim she's worthy.

"The laughably unqualified Jill Stein of the Green Party got 1.3 million votes; those voters almost certainly opposed Trump; if just the Stein voters in Michigan had cast their ballot for Clinton, she probably would have won the state. And there is no telling how many disaffected Sanders voters cast their ballot for Trump."

If Killary had come out against TTP, said what she'd Actually do for the country & not just attack Trump & Bernie I might have been able to hold my nose. Unfortunately, we learned of the Goldman Sachs speeches...

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/11011

She wasn't trustworthy.

'Of course, there will still be those voters who snarl, “She didn’t earn my vote,” as if somehow their narcissism should override all other considerations in the election. That, however, is not what an election is about. Voters are charged with choosing the best person to lead the country, not the one who appeals the most to their egos.'

My family suffered dearly due to NAFTA, what makes you think I want the murky sequel coming to pass?

Hillary just didn't have what it took to lead a country. Sorry you can't see that.